MikeB: “And if there were, the government would win and the gun owners would lose, period.”

Why couldn’t we win in Vietnam? And when we pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, the insurgents and Taliban will still be there. Mark my words.

What I was asking Jade was the specifics of the fight. What are the orders of the US Military? Is it to kill every man woman and child, bomb/nuke/level every city in the USA? Is it to round up and kill everyone who owns a gun? Or is it to squash only those who would oppose them? Are you starting to see the difficulties of a government trying to fight a resistance interspersed among its people? It is not as simple as the entire US military on one side of a field, and the American gun owning population standing on the other side of a line.

That picture made me laugh pretty hard, I have to admit!!I don't want him in my foxhole.

Let's see, times the US Military has been used against it's people? Miners strikes before 1950, 3 or 4 times. The city of angels in the riots. Once.Mobilized on and around 9/11.I really think the US soldiers would have issues with battling their own countrymen. BUT, I agree, if the battle was the entire US military and all it's might, versus some gun owners, we lose. But this game will never be played because the people rule.

It's the pro-gun crowd that keeps referring to this ridiculous scenario. You guys, the ones of you who keep referring to this, are nuts. There's my name for it, grandiose paranioa, or you could pick another.